Royston

Strangely enough if I introduced a few humble garden snails into my tank of GALS the GALS would be the ones that suffered...I can't remember the real reason for this, but I'll have a quick gander and get back to you. But as far as I know (although GALS are omnivores) I don't think they'd eat native slugs or snails.

This link gives the reasons for not releasing GALS into the wild...mainly as I've already stated the impact on the environment (particularly flora) and the rate of reproduction. http://www.manandmollusc.net/Odessa/GALS.html Small note I've just realised that my largest 'Sonic' is actually Achatina Fulica from East Africa...not the Ghana breed achatina achatina

Well thanks YT2095, I appreciate the thought...though I think it's illegal to release 'GALS' into the wild for a good reason, I'll have a browse to find out exactly the kind of impact they'd have. I should imagine off the top of my head they could disrupt the British eco-system somewhere down the line (these molluscs multiply and then some...in fact a few of mine were courting just months after hatching...once impregnated that's it they'll just continue laying batches of eggs !!!). But I'll get back to you with some details...if I find any, cheers

I always wanted one since seeing an unusual pets slot on a kids programme. There was the usual red knee tarantulas, stick insects, but the giant snails stuck out the most, they look so primitive, kind of ancient, plus they're great fun to watch (very graceful) and enjoy a good beer. They're very low maintenance (providing you prevent the eggs from hatching) and don't mind being handled...perfect.

Salt just dehydrates snails / slugs and isn't full proof, it's also very unpleasant for a mollusc. I think I'm gonna stick with the ether idea...let them pass peacefully in their sleep... thanks anyway for the suggestions.

I've sold a few...but they really aren't that popular. You can't realease them because although from Africa they can hibernate and survive the cold...in fact they can go without food and water for a long time. By accident I left one in an old tank for 3 months (no food or water) and managed to revive the little sod by breaking the seal that develops on the shell (where the sanil comes out) and soaking it in warm water. They also have clusters of around 100 eggs, depending on species. Your right as well though...I have one snail called Sonic who's body is about 8 inches long. They can get to over a foot in the wild depending on how much vegetation and calcium is available. So basically you let a few of those thrive in a field...and you've got big (being the operative word) problems. They're completely banned in the US except for research purposes.

Please find the news article here... http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9871982/ 'NASA has outlined what it could do, and in what time frame, in case a quarter-mile-wide asteroid named Apophis is on a course to slam into Earth in the year 2036. The timetable was released by the B612 Foundation, a group that is pressing NASA and other government agencies to do more to head off threats from near-Earth objects.'

lol, yeah they have been used as a cheap substitute for escargo (not my particular batch.) The babies would make a very light snack indeed. Though you've just reminded me there's a popular African restaurant just a mile from where I work...perhaps I should ask in there ? At least then I have no direct part in the...boiling / frying.

They actually have a tipple for stella, so I guess I'll have to fashion a little diving board for them, and literally make them 'walk the plank' into a pint glass. Wish it was 'talk like a pirate day'...hmm need a smiley with an eye patch.

Duplicate...double oops

I thought it was closed enough to not have an effect on the conservation of energy. This is why this device will never work. I didn't realise the first law spread to outer regions.

If you havn't read any of my previous posts I own giant african land snails. I have a large tank with plenty of burrowing substrate, and have found the snails more 'happy' if cleaning is left to a minimum, and so providing plenty of nutrients for the snails to feed on...they're not fussy as long as there is no advanced (I'm not a biologist) fungi. Basically fluffy food is a no no. The problem is, over the last couple of weeks they've been breeding, I noticed the circular dance but, due to ignoring the maintenance of the tank (and also due to african snails burying their eggs) I now have over seventy...impossible to release, and not generally popular pets on my hands. Whatever I feed them they consume...their size can be controlled by the amount of calcium and supplements I feed them, alongside hydrating veg, but that seems unfair to control them to suit my needs (albeit they are snails.) What is the most humane way to get rid of the little buggers. They won't all sell, I simply don't have the room for any that don't sell. You can probably tell that I find it hard to conciously kill something...they are thriving, healthy snails. BUT THEY MUST DIE ! ...thoughts, opinions.

Crop circles have already been proven to be a hoax. In fact a few years back a couple of people I knew created one, for a 'laugh'. I'm not sure what arguments there are to back up this theory, I stopped as soon as crop circles were mentioned...sorry to dampen your thread.

lol, I realise this (albeit it's under a thread titled 'questions on LQG & LQC) this was why I was asking what stance LQG had on some of the contents in the article, but no offense taken. ================

Another article that 'probes' dark energy... http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/hep-th/pdf/0404/0404170.pdf I found this section particularly interesting... 'So far sharpest experiments could probe gravity upto 0.1 mm and, in the matter sector, probe could be possible upto electroweak scale Mew = 100GeV, having wavelength as short as - 1.97 x 10-16 cm. It means that it is difficult to realise 4-dimensional gravity for length scales less than 0.1 mm. So, it is reasonable to think higher-dimensional gravity for scales smaller than this scale. The idea is parallel to the brane-world gravity, where it is assumed that gravity is stronger in higher dimensional space-time, called bulk and only a small part of it is realized in the observable universe. What's the position of LQG on 'small scale' gravity...if it's too technical please say. Another interesting point in the article is that 'dark energy is depleting through expansion...so creating dark matter.' So this creation is forcing the expansion of our universe. If energy increases when going into a 'gravity well' (black hole) as it's 'work' is, excuse the pun 'redundant' and gravity takes over then what's stopping dark energy creation in a black hole. If this is the case then gravity holds as an attracting force only...more dark energy is created than went in to a black hole, and the creation of dark matter through the inflation period increases the volume of space-time. There's a hell of a lot more 'dark energy converting to dark matter' to take up space in our universe than observable matter...if this creation is happening at present then surely this would describe the 'acceleration of expansion'. This is really off of the top of my head...as always feel free to correct my feeble knowledge of this subject.

The UK sex ed concentrated more on the 'organs' and only touched on STD's. Aids wasn't so media swamped back then, and was just mentioned when the video went on to 'safe sex'. All I remember was a lot of sniggering with a large arrow pointing to the testes. It was all rather clinical. The new video that's being circulated is based around a party with 'young' teenagers. It centres around a couple who 'cop off' to the bathroom...I don't think there's any actual sex scenes (that would be very wrong) but it concentrates more on your 'first time', and what to expect. I guess the dangers and the biology stem from the scenario. The video was covered on a local news story, so I'm not completely sure of the entire content, but I think it's a better approach, and had good feed back from those pesky kids.

Hi Jarryd, I've just re-read my post, and it's a pretty poor explanation...if you notice the time of the post (I was up at 5:30 in the morning due to a friend going away for a few months.) I didn't really have my thinking cap on...however this subject is quite dear to me, and I'm sure I'll post more as I learn more, and will try to explain interactions so they can be 'pictured'. Please read my thread on LQG/LQC where I've tried to ask the questions where I think people are having a hard time (myself included) in trying to visualize interactions in space-time. Always cross-reference anything you don't understand until it fits. That's all I can advise at the mo, I'm really quite new to studying this subject, but have had 'models' in my head since I can remember, it's only recently that I've realised how 'useful' they can be.

I kinda agree, however, where a lot of people slip up in visualizing particles is when they think of a particle as a point. 'Particle' is quite a broad term... I think, with regards to relativity, the cosmological constant is fundamental to understanding that particles 'take up' space...massless or not. Going back to the OP all I can suggest is getting your head round Planks constant, understand the 'exchange' between particles. Then understand massless particles are part of this exchange...photons being the electro-magnetic exchange. I'm yet to study weak and strong nuclear forces but they can both be regarded as 'force carrying particles' with a relativistic mass. If you want to stretch this to quantum mechanics...all I can offer is that energy exchange can be measured through 'quanta'. In that the position and velocity is meaured in units...imagine a car accelerating and determing it's position relative to it's speed. So you'll know it's position at 5 mph then 10 mph and at 15 mph, and so on...but relative to the other forces that are acting upon it at the time, which is why it's a very complicated process and can seem deterministic. This is my understanding 'so far' and I'm sure someone will correct me on the above. However, I'm in the same position, that visualizing is my closest tool to grasping the concepts of physics, and I'm under the ascertian that you can only fully understand the affects by creating a visual model that fits with your knowledge and the gaps are filled with imagination. As 'Tycho' stated above, remembering without understanding won't get you very far at all, and will get forgotten...I seldom make notes, but what makes sense, and what fits with my current understanding seems to connect quite nicely.

I tried posting this in the news forum before I realised it had been covered... 'Some defence lawyers in the case believe Mr Fitzgerald might pursue other possible charges, such as making false statements, obstruction of justice or mishandling of classified information, the Associated Press reports. Prosecutors have told Mr Rove they cannot guarantee he will not be indicted.' With regards to the last sentence and Karl Rove being 'key to the election strategy' for Bush, this could be the final blow. see latest BBC update here... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4342226.stm

I couldn't agree more...I tend to construct models first and fill in the data later. I've created dozens of models in my head and have to verify my visualization by asking questions (mainly on this forum) to make sure i'm getting a true 'picture'. I'm certainly not proclaiming anything here, I'm really bumbling my way through this. I've often overlooked a simple detail...or have had to go back and research where I'm going wrong and this seems to throw out a load more questions or gaps in my knowledge. However these soon dwindle down, and I'm beginning to find the connections between the 'mile stones' in physics / cosmology. By filling the gaps in your knowledge the tighter the model becomes. The trick is to include yourself 'the observer' as part of that model.

Well I'm very pushed for time today, but found this article that deals with the 'emphasis on the cosmological constant as the possible choice for the dark energy'...I'd like to add, as the article explains, there is no evidence for variation of dark energy density with red shift. So with my previous post on 'shadows' detected through the CMB observations...we can assume that these observations are not conclusive. http://www.citebase.org/cgi-bin/fulltext?format=application/pdf&identifier=oai:arXiv.org:astro-ph/0510492 Link to the 'shadow' article... http://www.sdss.org/news/releases/20030721.darkenergy.html